Abstract

A well-established risk management tool includes three processes that are identifying, analysing and
responding to project risks. because the first stage of the risk management process. Efficient risk
identification plays a vital role. During this study, we identify risks that construction companies face
while completing the residential construction project in Mumbai then this study also provides a
framework by implementing the AHP model for calculating the importance of each risk factor which
construction company faces while concluding the project in Mumbai.
To carry out this study we had taken residential construction project of fifty crores to 100 crores in
Mumbai then we Identified total 37 risk factors using secondary data by doing literature review of
papers, articles then these risk factors are further classified into 3 criteria i.e. internal risk factors,
Project related risk factors and external risk factors.
Data was collected from experts who are involved within the residential construction project in
Mumbai via a questionnaire survey, then data is analysed on statistical Package for the  social
science (SPSS) to generalize the input also as for checking the reliability of data we get from
construction industry experts. We performed a reliability test and calculated Cronbach’s alpha  and
discovered that our data is reliable. After generalizing data, we had prioritized  the internal, project-
specific and external risks using the Analytical hierarchy process (AHP) and identify most potential
risk factors that have the very best significance on the project and occur frequently. Risks in
construction projects can be internal, project-specific & external risks. We also find that project-
related risk factors are more critical and may affect project performance, any
company that's planning to initiate the project in Mumbai should take care of project-related risk and
do proper planning to mitigate project-related risk especially company should specialise
in management risk factors.
These findings will aid the construction company to understand differing kinds of risks, even before
they start their project in Mumbai. Construction companies are often better prepared & make plans to
mitigate risk even before starting the project.

Chapter 1
Introduction

Construction project require huge amount of investment so many people, put an endeavour to
reduce the cost. Change is inherent in construction work. Most of the projects fail  to fulfil
deadlines, cost and quality targets. this is often not too surprising considering that there aren't
known perfect engineers who have can end up the projects into success by doing cut
without compromising with other constraints, or they can make perfect designs or they
can predict perfectly how the forces of nature will behave during the construction phase of the
project. Construction projects are subjected to several risks thanks to complex nature of projects.
Therefore, risk management is recognized as a necessary tool to fulfil the project targets. According
to (Szymański, 2017) a well-established risk management method includes three processes that are
identifying, analysing and responding to project risks.
From last some year people are moving from rural areas to metropolitan cities in search of
employment because of which large opportunities for residential construction sector are developing
daily, As per report publish by KPMG (“Indian real estate and construction : Consolidating for
growth,” 2018) residential construction segment is contributing up to 80% to overall  land
development within the country. Mumbai as the most engaging city of country in terms of
employment destination thanks to which sizable amount of individuals are migrating each year to
Mumbai from all over the India thanks to which sizable amount of construction projects had started
in Mumbai from few years. Since increase in demand had increased the amount of pressure on the
project managers to deliver the projects on time at defined cost. due to which risk management has
become now days essential tool for analysing risks in the projects.

1.1 Risk Identification:

According to (Georgy, 2006) Risk identification is the process of determining risks that could
potentially prevent the program, enterprise, or investment from achieving its objectives. It
includes documenting and communicating the concern. The objective of risk identification is
the early and continuous identification of events that, if they occur, will have negative
impacts on the project's ability to achieve performance or capability outcome goals. They
may come from within the project or from external sources.

1.2 Risk Analysing:

Risk Analysis is a process that helps in managing potential problems that might undermine key
business initiatives or projects defined by (Yuan et al., 2018). to carry out a risk analysis,
first thing is to spot the possible threats that a project can face, then estimate the
likelihood that these threats will materialize. risk analysis may be complex, so it's important
to draw detailed information like project plans, financial data, security protocols,
marketing forecasts, and other relevant information. However, it's a necessary planning tool
and one that would save time, money, and reputations.

1.3 Risk Responses Planning:

According to (PMBOK,2016)The risk response planning involves determining ways to
reduce or eliminate any threats to the project, and therefore the opportunities to enhance their
impact. Project managers should work to eliminate the threats before they occur. Similarly,
project managers should work to make sure that opportunities occur. Likewise, the project
manager is additionally responsible to decrease the probability and impact of threats and increase the
probability and impact of opportunities. For the threats that can't be mitigated, the project
manager has to have a strong contingency plan and a response plan if contingencies don't
work. it's not required to eliminate all the risks of the project due to resource and time
constraints. A project manager should review the risk throughout the project. Planning for risks is
iterative. Qualitative risk, quantitative risk, and risk response planning  don't end ones you
begin work on the project.

2. Problem Statement:
Lack of anticipatory risk prevention mechanisms in residential real estate construction projects in
metropolitan Mumbai lead to higher uncertainty among three critical variables namely Time, Cost &
Money

3. Objective of Study:
1. to identify risk faced by construction companies while undertaking projects in
metropolitans’ cities.
2. Risk prioritisation among internal, external and project related risks on the basis of severity and
frequency of occurrence by using AHP

The generalization of the results aims to help new project managers to the sector to know
different types of risk even before they enter metropolitan cities project and be better
prepared to manage and mitigate risk.

4. Scope of study In this study we are going to identify risks which occur in residential
building construction projects. To carry out this research we planned to take residential
construction projects of 50 crore to 100 crores in Mumbai. Data will be collected from
experts via a questionnaire survey and then data will be analysed by means of statistical tool
to generalize the findings as much as possible for construction projects in metropolitan city
Mumbai. After generalizing the data, we will implement AHP to prioritize the risk and
identify which risk are potential risk and occur frequently. These finding will aid the Project
Manager be better prepared and device plan to manage and mitigate risk.
5. Research Methodology
The main source of data will be gathered through questionnaire survey to a group of experts
working in construction industry. The data collected from the experts via a questionnaire
survey is then analysed by mean of statistical tool to generalize the findings as much as
possible for construction project in metro Politian city Mumbai. These finding will aid the
construction company to identify risks efficiently for proper risk management of their new
project

Enough work has been done in inadequate risk management of construction project everywhere in
the world to turn the project into successful. However, most of the work is inclined towards risk
management of construction project not significant amount of labour has been done in risk
identification in residential building construction projects in Indian metropolitan’s cities. To fill the
gap of research already done, our objective of project is:
1. to identify risk faced by construction companies while undertaking projects in
metropolitans’ city Mumbai
2. The study also intends to prioritize the inside , project-related and external risks using
Analytical hierarchy process (AHP) the danger and identify most potential risks which have
high significance and occur frequently).
The generalization of the results aims to help new project managers to the planet to know
different types of risk even before they enter the metropolitan city's project and be better
prepared to manage and mitigate various risks.
This literature review includes number of journal article and books which are  related to
inadequate Risk management in construction project end in trouble projects, to support our
research work. The articles mention in literature review within the fore coming pages with their
work content and interference.
1.2 Risk Management in construction
risk management is one of the foremost important practices done nowadays in project management to
complete a project successfully. within the sixth publication of project management book (
PMI,2017, p.240.) definition of risk is given as: “Risk is an uncertain event or condition that, if it
occurs, has good or bad effect on a minimum of 1 project objective like time, cost and quality”.
After defining risk according to PMI and article published. Next step is to define the meaning
of the danger management process. Risk management could also be a formal process by
which we'll identify, analyse and calculate the consequence of risk on a project throughout the life
cycle of project,

to maintain an optimum level of risk elimination, mitigation, and management (Wang and
Dulaimi,2004). Thus, we can conclude that risk management is directly related to the success of
the project.
(Hwang, Zhao, & Toh, 2014) carried out a study to investigate risk management effect on
project success and to perform the study they taken a response from 34 companies and
concluded that there are relatively very low-level implementation of risk management technique
in construction project due to some barrier that is “lack of time”, “lack of budget”, “Low
profit margin” which result in overrun of time and cost. They also provided a method to
mitigate the risk for small construction company.
(Shojaei, Amin, & Haeri, 2019) carried out the study in which they said numerous risks are
faced by management while doing construction projects due to the involvement of different
parties. They also identified that there is a large gap between the literature and actual practice
of project risk management and concluded that managers mostly prefer to rely on experience
instead of preferring analytical tools to mitigate the risks. They also suggested a comprehensive
approach for risk management such as grounded theory and grey relational analysis.
A simple and systematic approach to risk management suggested by (Mills & Mills, 2014)
has basic 3 steps:
i. Risk identification- this step is focused on identifying and accessing the potential risk in
the project.
ii. Risk Quantification- This step is focused on quantifying the impact of risk on the project
objective.
iii. Risk response and Development control- This step help in exploring the opportunity in
which can be explored by managing risks throughout the life cycle.
Since opportunities & threats both dependent on each other in the project, so they can also
be deal at the same time (C. B. Chapman, Ward, & Bennell, 2000). The purpose of the risk
management process in a broader sense should not only be to guarantee a successful project,
but also to increase the expectations of the objectives and objectives of the project. It means
that the risk management of the project must become the management of project uncertainty.
(C. B. Chapman et al., 2000).

Figure 2 represents a Project Risk Management Overview given by PMI organization

(PMBOK, 2004)

Figure 2:Overview

Loch et al. (2006) gave a new concept about risk management that “Learning in projects is the
flexible adjustment of the project approach to the changing environment in project as it occurs”.
It is good to repeatedly practice of asking, “What do we know, what do we need to know, and
what might we not know that we do not know” (Loch, Meyer,2006). The authors define
selectivism as the execution of numerous parallel error tests. It is used more appropriately when
the environment is so uncertain that a single trial is unlikely to find an inadequate solution. The
combination of these two previous approaches, which depend on the complexity of the project
and the cost structure, can help us to manage unknown risks in a project.
Themsen & Skærbæk (2018) published thealiterature and gave a frame work to manage the
risk successfully and provide an approach to translate the uncertainty into pure and impure risk
by using longitudinal case study for a large mega project. In their framework they identified all
the risk according to the book of PMBOK and then classified all the risk into pure and impure
risk. According to the literature Pure risk are those risk which can be control in early phase and
impure risk are defined as those risk which can’t be control throughout the life cycle of the
project.
Walker, Davis, & Stevenson (2017) published an article to cope with uncertainty and ambiguity
through team collaboration in infrastructure project. In their research they developed the Weick
sense- making process of reflection to cope with uncertainty and ambiguity and in their
research, they concluded that collaboration of all stakeholder help in coping with uncertainty.
Along with that they also estimated the cost of collaboration which infrastructure company will
have to spend to increase the collaboration between different stakeholders.

Qazi, Quigley, Dickson, & Kirytopoulos (2016)in their published literature they proposed
modeling approach which is based on the theoretical framework of expected utility theory and
Bayesian belief network. Their framework was much focused on identifying critical risk
and selecting the optimal risk mitigation strategy to avoid risk at an initial phase of the construction
project and to support their work they performed empirical research in the construction industry
and implication of their study they had shown by performing simulations. They conducted
interview of experts from construction companies to understand the complexity in managing
the construction project and then finally prosed the model for risk mitigation in construction
project.
Dziadosz (2015) carried out the study in which they proposed that risk is a measurable part of
the uncertainty and can be mitigated if proper planning and steps taken before initiating the
project, They also said in their work that risks not always have negative effect on the project
some time risks also have positive effect on the project, Therefor risk management is essential
and desired things required to be done for completing the project successfully. In their study
they present three different method of different risk analysis along with their advantage and
disadvantages.
Ackermann, Howick, Quigley, Walls, & Houghton (2014) published article in which they
explained how long term project of any product development often result in over run in time
and cost as compare to estimated time and cost therefore keeping the complexity in mind about
the large projects it is very necessary to talk with different stakeholders who are involved in
project and identify all potential risks which can occur at each stage of the project. Thus, proper
sharing of information and involvement of stakeholder can mitigate the risks in the project.
Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas, Turskis, & Tamošaitienė (2010) carried out the research for
to assess risk which occur in construction project and they determine ranking of various factors
by using different tool such as TOPSIS and COPRAS-G to increase the decision-making power
of the project manager. The model proposed by the them was practically viable and can be
implemented for the project who have large budget and have no constraint of resources.
Alexander (2012) in their study they develop a methodology for quantifying model risk in
quantile risk estimates. They developed the framework to quantify the model risks and their
work was based on time series to provide solution in dealing with uncertainty, the model was
based on metrices that used to evaluate non-financial risks.

Olander & Landin (2005) they carried out the study in which they focused on negative attitude
of stakeholders toward the construction project and this negative attitude can severely effect
on the implementation of risk management process in the company. Such hindrance result in
cost overruns and exceeded time against the plan schedules due to conflicts between the owner
and stakeholders on project design. They suggested the method of mapping the concerns of
stakeholder to reduce the conflicts which result in proper Implementation of risk management
method across all the stakeholders.
Arashpour, Abbasi, Arashpour, & Hosseini (2017) carried out the study on hybrid
(Multidimensional) infrastructure project with a aim to suggest project manager to put more
emphasis
on risk associated with offsite and onsite of construction project and proved that proper risk
management result in decrease the significant chance of deviation from project objective, to
support their work they had prepared three hypothesis and tested using data taken from seven
project.
LEHTIRANTA (2011) carried out the study about relational risk management in multi
organizational construction project and author said Relational risk effect the project’s success
and gave a Pragmatic approach in which relational contractor guide relational RM in
construction projects. In their study, they provided the conceptual model of relational risk
management which was based on grounded theory by interviewing project managers.
C. Chapman & Ward (2004) in their work they explained why risk efficiency is important for
carrying out the project successfully and they also explain how risk efficiency can be addressed
at operationally using cumulative probability distribution.
Abrahamson et al. (2011) published an article in which they proposed detail steps required for
high quality project risk management process:
➢ Detailed specification of project and all potential associated risk.
➢ A clear perception of risk which could arise from any stakeholder.
➢ Enough capability & expertise to handle all the potential risks.
➢ For managing all the risk require an accountability, responsibility and authority of each
party to manage risk.

2. Fundamental construction Risks:

2.1 Risk Identification
Ling & Hoi (2006) published an article in which they analysed how Singapore companies face
difficulties to perform a construction project in India and how Singapore companies identify
the risk for doing construction project in India. Their study is much focused for AEC
(Architectural, Engineering and Construction) firms. For performing their research, they
floated the questionnaire to more than 50 experts who are doing project in India. In their study
they performed analysis on 7 risks.

Figure 3. Risk Factors Classification

Ding (1996) Published an article in which he gave a theory that in risk identification process it
is very important to analyse potential risk which can occur in project and also gave a
classification of risk. So, they proposed to make a list of all potential risk because list make an
easier task for the manager to analyse and visualize the risk and deal with them properly. So,
they proposed the framework in which they divided risk into three main group:
1. Internal Risk:
These risks are those risk which can be control easily by the project team for example scope,
production cost etc. Due to involvement of different partner in construction project reduce the
autonomy of main owner due to which internal risk become very critical and affects directly
on the performance of project.
2. Project specific risk:
This involve all the uncertainty which can occur in the construction project and result in time
or cost overrun. Project specific risk occur due to lack of information flow and poor
relationships between all stakeholders in a project which result in delay of delivery of material
or Labour strike

3. External risk:
10 | P a g e
This includes those risk that can’t be controlled by project team like the action of state,
flood, Earthquake, etc. These risk factors ar thought of because the most vital risk as a result of
any political dispute or political change will have an effect on the project, for instance, there was an
instruction in UAE that to prevent construction work for the period of the summer (July and
August) from 1 to 3 am. This regulation has affected dramatically the continuing project.
Baloi & Price (2003) published a piece of writing in which they separated construction risk into 2
categories: a broad list and an impact list
Table 1. Typical Construction Risk
Table 2. Risk Comparison by their Impact
Jayasudha & Vidivelli (2016) in their study they identified the importance of risk assessment
by identifying the risk involved within the project to avoid delay in the project, In their study, they
identified total thirteen risk factor and analysis was done by taking a data through questioner from
project managers of a distinct project then data was analyzed by using SPSS, They distributed
the risk into five components that are:
I. Technical risk
II. Design risk
III. Management risk
IV. Environmental risk
V. Physical risk

Tadayon, Jaafar, & Nasri (2012) carried out the study in which they gave the strategy the method they
identify the risk and provided various technique determine|to spot} the chance in their study they classified
the risk into eleven classes to perform a study on the chance Janus-faced by construction company whereas
carrying out the project in Asian nation. The carried-out study by classifying risk into eleven components then
applied formal and informal approaches to spot whether or not that risk exists or not. Risks given by
them are:
1. financial risk
2. Construction risk
3. Demand risk
4. Political risk
5. environment risk
6. Technological risk
7. Geographical risk
8. Geotechnical risk
9. Communication risk
10. Legal risk
11. Social risk
Marques & Berg (2011) administrated the study to examines however risk is reflected in
infrastructure regulatory contracts, they conjointly provided a framework for risk distribution in
Partnerships between public and personal sectors. They classified the chance between a pair of components and
carried out the study to identify the significance of each risk that occur:

Figure 4: Risk Classification into 2 categories

Verma, Verma, & professor (2017) administrated the study during which they said Construction risks

can be mitigated only when their cause is known. Their objective of the study was to review
the risk assessment within the construction of high-rise buildings. This study was carried out based on the literature review
and a questionnaire survey, they proposed various techniques to identify risk in the project.
Couper, Hugo, Conradie, & Mfenyana (2007) published a piece of writing in which he concluded that
the most structured way to analyze and list down all risk and classified all the risk in the risk
breakdown structure.

Figure 5. Risk Management Structure sample

El-Sayegh & Mansour (2015) in their study they highlighted the risks associated with highway
construction projects in United Arab Emirates (UAE). They identified total thirty-three
risks through elaborate literature review and divided into 2 components internal and external. To find
the significance of every risk they developed a form to solicit the opinion of construction
professionals, then they classified all risk in line with the likelihood of occurrence to
generalize the result.

Tchankova, (2006) the process of risk management begins with risk identification which

develops the basis for the next steps of research, assessment, and control. If this can be done correctly it ensures risk
management effectiveness.
Zheng, Zhao, Wang, & Liu (2011) carried out the study in which they worked about
environmental risk in construction project and identified how environmental risk assessment is very important in
construction project & said throughout the period of construction and operation of
construction projects, the foreseeable unexpected events or accidents may lead to build
toxic, flammable and explosive materials leak, or produce new toxic and harmful substances,
which impacts and damages human safety and environment. thus Environmental risk
assessment for a construction project is vital so the project manager can evaluate the impact and damage, and put
forward preventive, emergency and mitigation measures.
Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas et al. (2010) in their study that they had done a risk assessment in construction projects for
doing risk assessment they followed a multi-criteria decision-making technique. for choosing the risk analysis attributes
taken interest of goal and interest of stakeholders as well as all the factors that have an influence on the project success &
ranking of those factors are done on TOPSIS and COPRAS methods. first they identified the risk and classified into internal,
external and project-related risk then applied gray system theory for risk assessment.
3. Multi-Criteria decision making (MCDM)
As per the definition of International Society on Multiple Criterion decision making, MCDM is
defined as “The study of method and procedure by which multiple and conflicting criteria will
be incorporated into the decision process”. Since early 1971, we started witnessing the
advancement of MCDM. the primary goal of MCDM is to administer decision-maker with an
apparatus to empower them to progress in illuminating a multiple-criteria alternative issue, where
a few clashing criteria are considered. (Mardani, Jusoh, Nor, Khalifah, & Valipour, 2015) in
their review paper, they concluded that MCDM is often thought to be an advanced decision
technique which incorporates each qualitative and quantitative parameter and concluded Analytical
hierarchy process (AHP) methodology in the individual tools and hybrid MCDM in the integrated methods were graded as
the first and second methods in use nowadays for decision-making
technique.
14 | P a g e
Mardani et al. (2015) concluded that from 2000-2014 in fields of construction management,
project management, safety and risk management 37 articles (9.05%) have applied an MCDM
approach and techniques.
Table 3 summary of applications of the DM techniques
Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas, Turskis, & Iovas (2013) in their study they focused on how
construction company faces challenge whereas taking decisions in choosing technology.
Selection of effective technological systems in construction could be a complicated multi-criteria task.
Many decision-makers refuse innovations once Janus-faced with similar difficulties. Their article
presents an original approach towards the development of multi-criteria assessment and ranking techniques for alternatives
of technology choice in construction.
3.1 The categorization of MCDM methods:
There are differing kinds of MCDM methods can be found in literature very frequently. The
list of some mainstream MCDM techniques that are used today are:
1. Elementary method
2. unique Synthesis Criterion method
3. Outranking method

Figure 6. different types of MCDM technique

Mardani et al. (2015) whole classification was created by considering the author study in which they
classified distinctive synthesis criterion method into 9 methods.
3.2 Analytical hierarchical process
Yalcin, Reis, Aydinoglu, & Yomralioglu (2011) they performed the comparative study
between totally different multi-criteria decision methods and used analytical hierarchical process,
bivariate, multivariate, logistics regression, fuzzy logic and artificial neural network and
concluded that AHP provides the most accurate result as compared to different methods and accuracy
were observed whereas carrying the test again and again by varying
the data as compare to different methods.
Zhang, Zayed, Hijazi, & Alkass (2016) in their study the known the factors touching
constructability of building designs and relatively weighted mistreatment Analytical Hierarchy process
(AHP) technique supported a questionnaire survey collected throughout the experts. They also
provided the framework for analysis criteria to assist {the style|the planning|the look}er to judge the design.
Aminbakhsh, Gunduz, & Sonmez (2013) in their study they presented a safety risk assessment
framework that was supported the idea of cost of safety (COS) model and also the analytic
hierarchy process (AHP). the most contribution of the proposed framework is that it presents
a robust method for prioritization of safety risks in construction projects and to make a rational
budget and to set realistic goals without compromising safety. Their framework provides a
decision tool for the decision-makers to work out the adequate accident/injury prevention
investments whereas considering the funding limits

4. Summary of literature review: Involvement of different stake holders in construction

project make them complex due to which construction project face different type of risks. So,
identification of risk in early phase of the project is very important for the success of the
project. Many researchers had worked in risk identification area and provided different
classifications of risk to aid construction companies. Some authors have classified risk factors
into 2 categories internal and external, where as some have classified risk factors into 3
categories internal, project specific and external risk factors. But we find that classification of
risk factors into 3 categories make risk identification process more systematic and simplified.
The reason for classification of risk factors into 3 categories is because some risk factors
depend on both internal and external conditions, so it can also said that project specific risk
factors are subset of internal and external risk. To carry out our research I had classified risks
into three categories internal risk, project specific risk and external risk and after that these 3
factors are further classified into 10 categories, detailed risk breakdown structure is shown by
figure 9.

Figure 7: Project risk Classification

4.1 Identified Risk factors:

Figure 8: Identified Risk factors:

Whole classification of risk has been done by reviewing literature of past work, ( Jayasudha
& Vidivelli, 2016) proposed internal and external risk in construction project then (Do,
Likhitruangsilp, Kiet, & Nguyen, 2017) proposed project related risk in joint venture. Further
classification of risk into internal and external risk was done by (DUNOVIĆ,
RADUJKOVIĆ, & VUKOMANOVIĆ, 2013). So, to carry out study we had divided risks
into 3 factors by reviewing literature work done in past.

4.2 Detailed Risk Breakdown Structure: Detailed Risk breakdown structure was made by
reviewing the literature work already done and a study done by (Jayasudha & Vidivelli,
2016) gave a framework of 11 risks then (Yean, Ling, & Hoi, 2006) gave another risk factors
which company face while doing projects in different countries then (Do et al., 2017) gave a
RBS which include 35 risks faced by firm while doing construction project. Then (El-Sayegh
& Mansour, 2015) carried out study in which they classified 31 risk into two categories
internal and external.

Chapter 3
Methodology
3.1 Risk Identification:
In Mumbai the demand for housing has been increasing, supply is very limited due
to non-availability of land and therefore the rising costs. This makes most construction
projects non feasible and therefore the before the implications fall both on the contractors and
the buyers because of which it's
become necessary to use the danger management tool before initiating a project in Mumbai.
To evaluate the importance of every risk faced by construction company while doing the
residential construction project in Mumbai, we had first done a literature review and after
going
through several research papers published by different authors we had identified total 37
risks, Which construction company generally encounter while completing the residential
construction project. After identifying the 37 different risks, we had classified risk into three
categories & we further classified each category into a sub-category

1. Internal risk
2. Project Related risk
3. External risk.
These risks are further classified into different categories as shown below:

3.2 Questionnaire:

To evaluate the importance of every risk which construction company face while doing the project,
we had designed a multiple-choice questionnaire for taking the input from different
professionals who are working in construction industry. The questionnaire was distributed to
construction companies’ professionals who are performing on a residential construction project and
associated with the Mumbai market. to make sure that every expert who goes to fill the survey
have completely understood the questionnȧire, a synopsis wȧs written to elucidate the main
the objective of the survey, in order that each respondent can understand the necessity for a survey
and after
that they will give their valuable input about the danger which they face during project and provides
significance of every risk what proportion each risk can affect the project.
The questionnaire was divided into 3 sections. Before the questionnaire section start, we had asked
some general information about the respondent like during which company they're working
and how a few years of labor experience they're having within the housing industry . within the first
section cares with internal risk and this section is split into 2 subsections that are
organization risk factors which contains 4 questions and therefore the second subsection is partner-
related
risk factors, this subsection consists of 5 questions. The second section  cares with
project-related risk factors and this section is split into 4 subsections, first subsection in
management-related risk and this subsection consists of 6 questions, the Second subsection is
technical risk factor which consists of three questions, Third subsection is design risk factor and
consist of 3 questions, the Fourth subsection is procurement & logistic risk factors which consist
of 3 questions. the primary section cares with External risk factors and this section is
divided into 4 sub-sections, the primary subsection is Political risk factors and this subsection
consists
of 4 questions, the second subsection is Social risk factors which contains 4 questions, third sub
section economical risk factors which contains 3 questions, the fourth subsection is
Environmental risk factors which contains 2 questions.
Questionnaires were sent to 19 companies professional and total 13 return to us, resulting a
response rate of 68%. A sample of the Project RiskfManagement Questionnaire is attached in
Appendix 1.
The respondents are recognized experts in their fields with having a minimum of 1 year of
experience. 30.8% of the respondents had a long-term experience of quite 10 years and
23.1% had experienced between 5 years to 10 years and 46.2% of the respondents having
experience between 1 year to five years.
Figure 10: Experience of respondents within the housing industry
3.3 Reliability test
After getting the info through the questionnaire we imported the info into the SPSS for analyzing
and to see the reliability of the info we had performed a reliability test before performing the
46.2%
23.1%
30.8%
Experience of respondents within the housing industry
Less than 5 years quite 5 years but but 10year quite 10 year

reliability test we undergo the past literature to see weather reliability test are often

performed in my study because in our study sample size is extremely small and located that
according
to (YURDUGÜL, 2014) if in questionnaire there are quite 30 no. of the item than reliability
the test are often performed and in our study, there are 37 constraints. So, to see the reliability of
the questionnaire we had performed a reliability test during which we calculated Cronbach’s alpha
and
according to (YURDUGÜL, 2014) if Cronbach’s alpha is bigger than .5 then data is reliable.
Basically, Cronbach’s ȧlpha may be a measure of internal inconsistency, that is, how closely related
a set of things are as a gaggle . it's a measure of scale reliability. A “high” value for ȧlpha does
not imply that the measure is unidimensional. If, additionally to measuring internal consistency,
you wish to supply evidence that the size in question is unidimensional, additional analyses
can be performed. Cronbȧch’s ȧlpha isn't a statistical test – it's a coefficient of reliability (or
consistency).
Cronbȧch’s ȧlpha are often written as a function of the amount of test items and therefore
the average intercorrelation among the items. Below, for conceptual purposes, we show the formula
for the
Cronbach’s alpha:
𝛼=
𝑵. 𝒄
𝒗 + (𝑵 − 𝟏). 𝑪
Here,
N is equȧl to the amount of things ,
c is that the averȧge inter-item covariȧnce among the things
v-bar equals the averȧge variȧnce.
24 | P a g e
3.4 Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP)
After performing the reliability test of the questionnaire, Significance  of every risk is calculated on
MS Excel to seek out out the relative importance of every risk. Relative importance is calculated by
performing a pairwise comparison between each risk factor and therefore the model of AHP is
developed to
find the criticality of every risk factor. during this study, risk is assessed into 3 criteria and every
criterion is split into sub-criteria. the method of AHP implementation is shown below in steps.
Step 1:
Creating the hierarchy. Building the hierarchy is usually the foremost challenging step once we go
for AHP implementation. Creating the hierarchy requires a classification of all the danger into
different criteria and every category is further divided into sub-criteria for the varied factors
and sub-factors that directly influence the general goal. The hierarchy is meant in such how
so that these alternatives are accurately evaluated on their ability to satisfy  the general goal.
The hierarchy starts at the highest by clearly stating the goal of the matter . Directly beneath this
goal are the first criteria to be considered when making the choice . In Figure 12, we see
that the danger factors within the construction project is listed at the highest of the hierarchy and is
broken
down into three key criteria that directly influence the project

Figure 11: AHP Structure

Step 2:
Using AHP to work out the relative importance of the standards . to guage the importance
of each risk using AHP we used the elemental Scale as shown in table 4.
Table 4:AHP Scale
By using the above AHP scale we had determined the relative importance of the standards . Using
pairwise comparisons, the relative importance of 1 criterion over another was calculated.
We had also done a Pairwisepcomparisons d for the sub-criteria to work out the relative
importance of the sub-criteria

We had performed the four pairwise comparisons during which the primary pairwise comparison was
done
between the standards that are between Internal risk factors, Project related risk factors and
External risk factors. then , we had done a pairwise comparison of every sub-criteria to
calculate the relative weightage of every sub-criteria also and make a comparison within the end. A
pairwise comparison matrix is shown below in figure 13.

Figure 12: Pairwise Comparison of risk Factors

Here,
Relative importance is that the eigen vector of relative importance.
Relative importance = α ij /∑
𝑚
𝑖=1 α ij ; j = 1, m
Where
27 | P a g e
αij - importance sub-criteria I with sub-criteria.
Similarly, the eigenvector of the relative importance contributions (i.e., weights)  of every
criterion is calculated.
3.5 Data Analysis
The filled questionnȧires were collected from the drop-off points and therefore the data entered the
StatisticalxPackage for SociȧlnScience (SPSS). All items and sub-items were transformed into
relevant variables. The answers and their alternȧtivesjwere coded using value labels, and the
variables entered for analysis. Descriptivebanalysis enabled frequency tables, means, standard
deviations and rankings to be established. To present the info , charts were generated in
Microsoft Excel.

3.6 Summary of the chapter

In this chapter, we've presented an in depth account of the methodology adopted for the study,
the procedures involved within the data collection and analysis, and therefore the strategies wont
to enhance
the reliability of the info . The researcher adopted mixed-method research with the utilization of the
questionnȧire and focus group as main data collection tools and techniques. The research
followed an embedded design where results from the quantitative research were first analyzed
and then AHP is implemented to calculate the importance of every risk. The chapter has
provided an summary of the info analysis tools and methods. subsequent chapter presents the
findings of the study after the analysis of the quantitative survey.
Chapter 4
Results
4.1 Introduction
This chapter presents and analyses the info that was gathered from the quantitative primary
and secondary research (the questionnaire survey and literature review) and explains how they
are embedded with the qualitative research. It begins by presenting the profiles of the
respondents, including their experience of respondents within the housing industry , before
analyzing their responses to the survey questions. This data was used to calculate risk
criticality and to rank the risks so as of perceived significance. The chapter ends by setting
out a proposed AHP model for calculating risk significance.
4.2 Respondents’bProfile
All 13 respondents within the sample returned their questionnȧires. The characteristics of the sample
are presented below.
Participants were asked about the amount of years that they had worked within the housing industry .
The people that filled the questionnaire are recognized experts in their fields with having at
least 1 year of experience. 30.8% of the respondents having an experience of quite 10
years and 23.1% had experienced between 5 years to 10 years and 46.2% of the respondents
having experience between 1 year to five years.
Figure 13: Respondent Profile
46.2%
23.1%
30.8%
Experience of respondents within the housing industry
Less than 5 years quite 5 years but but 10year quite 10 year
29 | P a g e
4.3 Comments on the questionnaire
A total of 37 risk factors are listed within the questionnȧire and weightage of every risk factor is
calculated by analyzing data on the SPSS. Column 1 of Table 5 presents the foremost significant
risk types included within the questionnȧire while column 2,3,4,5 presents what proportion the
respondent
as rated risk while filling the questionnaire. These risk types were supported an in depth literature
review

Table 5: Risk significance Table

In table number 4 risk are rated by the respondent for example: In risk factor Over-interference
in the project by the parent company of either partner of venture 53.8% of respondents said it's a
moderate risk which could potentially bring negative consequences, posing a moderate
threat to the project. Similarly, all respondent input has shown in table no. 5.
4.4 Data Reliability Test
After getting the info through the questionnaire I imported the info into the SPSS for analyzing
and to generalize the results. So, we will check the reliability of the questionnaire and to perform
a reliability test during which I calculated Cronbach’s alpha and consistent with (YURDUGÜL,
2014)
if Cronbach’s alpha is bigger than .5 then data is reliable. So, after analyzing the info on SPSS
we are becoming the Cronbach’s alpha 0.809 it means your data set is reliable and that we can
implement AHP for calculating the relative importance of every risk factor. In figure 14 we
have shown the results of our scaling test in SPSS.

Figure 14:SPSS test Cronbach's Alpha

4.4 Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP)

After performing the reliability test of the questionnaire, Now subsequent task we've done is to
calculate the importance of every risk basically to seek out out the relative importance of every risk.
To calculate the importance of every risk I implement AHP and made a model of AHP where I
classified risk factors into 3 criteria and divided each criterion into sub-criteria.
4.4.1 Results of internal risk factors:
we had done a pairwise comparison of every criterion by doing a pairwise comparison between sub-
criteria of internal risk factors to calculate the importance of every sub-criteria risk factors and
rank them consistent with the criticality of every risk factor. Firstly, we had considered the interior
risk and do a pairwise comparison between partner-related risk and organizational risk factors
and we find that organization risk factors are more significant and have a high impact on the
a project with a relative weightage of 0.67 and partner related risk factors have medium impact
on the project with a relative weightage of 0.33. AHP pairwise comparison matrix of internal
risk is shown below in table 6. Ranking of internal risk factors is shown in figure 16.

Table 6: Pairwise comparison of internal risk factors

Figure 15:Ranking of internal risk Factors

4.4.2 Results of project related risk factors:

we had done a pairwise comparison of each criteria by doing pairwise comparison between
sub criteria of project related risk factors to calculate the significance of each sub criteria risk
factors and rank them according to the criticality of each risk factors. We had considered the
project related and done a pairwise comparison between partner Management risk, Technical
risk, Design risk and procurement & logistic risk factors and we find that management risk
factors are more significance in residential construction project and have high impact on the
project with a relative weightage of 0.54 whereas technical risk, design risk, procurement &
logistic risk have low impact on the project with a relative weightage of 0.08, 0.23, 0.15.
AHP pairwise comparison matrix of internal risk is shown below in table 7. Ranking of
project related risk factors is shown in figure 16.

Table 7: Pairwise comparison of project related risk factors

Figure 16: Ranking of project related risk factors

4.4.3 Results of external risk factors:

we had done a pairwise comparison of each criteria by doing pairwise comparison between
sub criteria of external risk factors to calculate the significance of each sub criteria of external
risk and rank them according to the criticality each risk can have on the project. We had
considered 0.54 0.08 0.23 0.15 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 Management risk Technical risk
Design risk Procurement & Logistic risk Ranking of Project related risk factors Relative
Mean 35 | P a g e the external risk and done a pairwise comparison between partner Political
risk, Social risk, economical risk and environmental risk factors and we find that political risk
factor and Social risk factor have more significance in residential construction project and
have medium impact on the project with a relative weightage of 0.49, 0.31 whereas
economical risk factor and environment risk have low impact on the project with a relative
weightage of 0.12, 0.08. AHP pairwise comparison matrix of external risk factors is shown
below in table 8 and ranking of all external factors is shown in figure 17.

Table 8: Pairwise comparison of external risk factor

Figure 17: Ranking of external risk factors

4.4.4 Results of pairwise comparison of overall all risk factors:
We had implemented AHP to calculate the significance of each risk and done a pairwise
comparison between our main criteria that are internal risk, Project related risk and external
risk to rank these three risks based on their criticality. By doing pairwise comparison between
main 3 criteria we found that most critical risk factor is project related risk with a weightage
of 0.67 and second most critical risk factor is external risk with a weightage of 0.26 and
internal risk are third in significance with a weightage of 0.10. After ranking the risks, we had
also classified these risk factors into 3 categories high, medium and low risk and project
related risk are having high impact risk, External risk are medium impact risk and internal
risk have low impact on the project as compare to project related and external risk. AHP
pairwise comparison matrix is shown below in table 9. Ranking of three risk factors are
shown in figure 18

Table 9: Pairwise comparison of criteria

Figure 18: Ranking of risk factors

4.4.5 Global Weight Comparison of all sub factors After implementing AHP and performing
pairwise comparison we had calculated global weightage of all criteria to compare all the
subfactors risk with each other and rank all the risk based on the global weight. Global
weight calculation is show in table 10.

Figure 19: Global weight of sub criteria

After calculating global weight of all risk sub criteria, we had ranked all the sub criteria and
Ranking of risk has been shown in table no. 11.

Table 11: Ranking of risks

Figure 20: Ranking Of risks Factors

In figure 19 ranking of list is shown, Management risk stand at rank 1 with a global weight of
0.344 and followed by Design risk with global weight of 0.051. Most insignificant risk we
found is environmental risk with a global weightage of 0.021 which as very less effect on the
project as describes by the respondent.

The objective of this project is to identify the risks factors that currently occur while doing
residential construction project in Mumbai in terms of their categorization and levels of severity.
To calculate the criticality of every identified risk we implemented AHP. A framework was then
developed to calculate the relative importance of risks consistent with their severity. Finally, we find
that project-related risk is more critical and any company who is getting to initiate the project in
Mumbai should lookout of project-related risk and do proper getting to mitigate project-related
a risk especially the corporate should concentrate on management risk factors.
After doing risk factors ranking supported relative weight we found that the majority critical risk is
management risk and most insignificant risk is environment risk and economical risk because
these risks occur unexpectedly so, it becomes very difficult to mitigate these risks perfectly
due to this reason, Mumbai experts concluded that these 2 risk factors are insignificant in
comparison to other risk factors.
After mitigating project-related risk company should specialise in external risk and do proper
planning
because political risk and social risk factors have an excellent effect on the project and may end
in the
failure of the project or overrun of cost, time. So, proper planning is required by  the
development company
before initiating a project in Mumbai.
While talking with the experts for gathering data we found that a lot of people believe that there
is no failure in projects, only opportunities are there. Unfortunately, people that are
involved during a failure of the project thanks to environmental risk factors, like better to forget
it the earlier
because they consider it bad luck. this is often just a waste of experience by thinking in such
away, because the teachings project managers can take from failure will help them to enhance
their knowledge and may they will come up with proper getting to prevent the project from
failure during a disaster.
5.1 Internal Risk:
53.8% of respondent claimed Over-interference within the project by the parent company of either
partner
of venture may be a moderate Risks that would possibly bring -ve outcomes, representing a
a moderate threat to the project.
46.2% of respondent claimed problems thanks to partners’ different practice during project
construction phase is Critical Risks have generous -ve outcomes which will genuinely affect the
success of the Project in terms of cost and time.
46% of respondent claimed that poor relation between different project team and financial
problem in partner company are Critical Risks have generous negative outcomes which will
genuinely affect the success of the Project
76% of respondent claimed disagreement on allocation of labor during a venture is additionally a
Critical Risks have generous negative outcomes which will genuinely affect the success of the
Project
5.2 Project Related risk Factors
61.5 you look after respondent claimed that improper project feasibility study of the project may be a
catastrophic Risks with outrageous -ve results that would cause the whole project to fail or can
disturb daily operations of the project.
While 53.8% of respondent claimed that error in engineering drawing may be a Critical Risks have
generous -ve outcomes which will genuinely affect the success of the Project

5.3 External risk Factors

61.5% of respondent claimed that a rise within the cost of staple thanks to changes in policies is

critical Risks have generous -ve outcomes which will genuinely affect the success of the Project
in terms of cost and time.
While 46.2% of respondent claim import restriction applied by government suddenly  may be a
Critical Risks have generous -ve outcomes on the project and may genuinely affect the success
of the Project in terms of cost and time